A salvo was fired at Jerusalem, all rockets intercepted, minor damage due to debris.

IDF had called all Gaza residents that live close to the border and ordered them to evacuate for their own safety, this might mean that the ground operations will commence tonight, but it could just as much be some psych warfare.

5 rockets fired at Gush-Dan just now. During the night Hamas' rockets hit as far as Hadera- a city that symbolizes the border between Israel's center and it's north, some 110(!)km away from the Gaza strip.
During the last round with Hezbollah (2006) they only targeted Hadera once, if memory serves.
Just to clarify- for every "exotic" rocket, several regulars are fired. Some 225 rockets were fired from Gaza at Israel in the last 3 days, 40 of them were intercepted by Iron Dome.

I looked up Iron Dome-what an amazing system.

They use parts from toy cars in the missiles.

75-95% success rate: incredible.

__________________
Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

It is not meant to be used as a huge shield that forces us to remain passive thinking we are protected from everything.

Passivity is the key to losing.

I would not want to waste your time if these hours might be those just before you have to be deployed. But if you can, I'd like to ask this: you wrote the above as if there is some party or group advocating just that (i.e. something like "now that we have defensive measures that work 90% of the time, let's not use pre-emptive or offensive measures"). Local pacifists? If so, could you provide a pointer?
Or am I reading something in your words that actually isn't there?

According to Haaretz, so far, 80 residents of Gaza have been killed and more then 400 hospitalized, some are civilians who have nothing to do with the conflict, simply caught in the crossfire between folks who disagree with each other. While no Israelis have been killed, nine Israels have suffered "light injuries" and about 59 israels have been treated for shock.

Its interesting to note how President Abbas is reacting to the situation in Gaza, let us not forget that just a few years back, there was a war between Fatah and Hamas. So, while President Abbas has condemned Israel for its bombing of Gaza, we ought to keep in mind, the recent war between the two Palestinian groups.

The IDF has launched over 800 strikes in the Strip since the operation began, 60 on Thursday morning alone. Medical officials in Gaza said over 81 Palestinians have died and more than 400 others, mainly civilians, have been hospitalized.

More than 250 rockets and mortar shells have been fired from Gaza at Israel since Tuesday, and the shooting continued throughout much of Wednesday night, with Be'er Sheva and Ashkelon targeted. Long-range rockets were fired at Tel Aviv twice on Thursday morning, with at least one interception confirmed by the IDF.

I would not want to waste your time if these hours might be those just before you have to be deployed.

No worries. If I'm here it means that I have nothing else to do and that I'm doing my best not to study....

So far the only reservists called up are for certain fields (search and rescue, intel, etc.) or to swap out regular units so they can redeploy to the south. Non of the "big guns" had been drawn yet.

Quote:

But if you can, I'd like to ask this: you wrote the above as if there is some party or group advocating just that (i.e. something like "now that we have defensive measures that work 90% of the time, let's not use pre-emptive or offensive measures"). Local pacifists? If so, could you provide a pointer?
Or am I reading something in your words that actually isn't there?

No, its a general feeling that can be the topic of a PhD, not a mere post

Essentially the West had grown extremely sensitive to casualties, both civilian and military- many times to a degree that incapacitates the ability to conduct war properly. In Israel almost everyone knows someone on the front line and wants to see them safe, the borders between frontline and rear, military and civilian grew kind of blurred.

The human mind has a tendency to repress. When Israel pulled out of Gaza everyone knew that it'll come to this, but actively or passively, vocally or silently repressed it (of course some acted exactly the opposite- but a minority).

Now we have Iron Dome to protect us. The original intention for it was to be deployed at strategic military locations and not to protect the general populace, but again the passivity dictated its usage.

Now people see the system and how great it works and think that the fight is over, we can just hunker down, deflect everything they throw at us and just wait it out. Repressing the fact that throughout history- whenever a technological improvement presented an unbreakable defense- a different technological improvement invited presented the weapon that can break that defense.
That is without taking into account the monetary drain it causes, or the terror effect even without major casualties, nor the fact that Iron Dome doesn't and can't protect all towns...

Some source was recently cited saying that only 30% of Israelis support a ground campaign. I don't know if its true and I don't know what the survey consisted off (I think its way off personally) but the trend is showing- people don't want to risk soldiers lives for what they perceive as an unnecessary risk.

The Iron Dome is a fantastic tactical achievement, but the way it is currently employed makes for a devastating strategy.

In order to help you, the IDF is like a bus driver doing his job; from time to time an accident may happen, even if he does his very best to prevent that.

Hamas is a madman who jumps on a bus and drives full speed into a pedestrian plaza trying to hit as many pedestrians as he can.

There's a problem with that analogy - by making the weapons systems the same 'bus', you imply that Hamas has equally precise weapons capable of hitting specific GPS coordinates. That is not correct - the Israelis can hit precisely, Hamas has the technical capacity only to aim at very large targets.

According to Haaretz, so far, 80 residents of Gaza have been killed and more then 400 hospitalized, some are civilians who have nothing to do with the conflict, simply caught in the crossfire between folks who disagree with each other. While no Israelis have been killed, nine Israels have suffered "light injuries" and about 59 israels have been treated for [I]shock.

It's pretty clear that neither Gaza nor Israel can fix this problem. The US has to step up and the international community has to occupy Gaza and rout out all the rockets. Israel doesn't have the resources to fix the problem itself, and Gaza cannot be expected to shake the control of the terrorist organization running it.

There's a problem with that analogy - by making the weapons systems the same 'bus', you imply that Hamas has equally precise weapons capable of hitting specific GPS coordinates. That is not correct - the Israelis can hit precisely, Hamas has the technical capacity only to aim at very large targets.

And yet they aim not at military facilities, but strictly at civilian populations.

That is a key distinction between the two.
There's a problem with that analogy - by making the weapons systems the same 'bus', you imply that Hamas has equally precise weapons capable of hitting specific GPS coordinates. That is not correct - the Israelis can hit precisely, Hamas has the technical capacity only to aim at very large targets.

Exactly. HAMAS wants to hit civilians.

The IDF spends a great deal of money and takes on unnecessary risks to avoid hitting civilians.

The difference is akin to that between a maniac with a chainsaw and a doctor having to cut a body open to get at cancer. Both cause scarring, pain, and possibly death, but the goals, intentions, and state of mind are worlds apart.

__________________
Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

The IDF spends a great deal of money and takes on unnecessary risks to avoid hitting civilians.

The difference is akin to that between a maniac with a chainsaw and a doctor having to cut a body open to get at cancer. Both cause scarring, pain, and possibly death, but the goals, intentions, and state of mind are worlds apart.

There would be only one way to find out for sure - give Hamas the scapel and see whether they make precision cuts or not.

It's pretty clear that neither Gaza nor Israel can fix this problem. The US has to step up and the international community has to occupy Gaza and rout out all the rockets. Israel doesn't have the resources to fix the problem itself, and Gaza cannot be expected to shake the control of the terrorist organization running it.

There is an amazing logical fallacy being put forth by some of the extreme pro Israel folks on this board. These folks are saying that Gazans are basically nothing but terrorists. As opposed to viewing the situation with a military mind, as in, we have two sides who vehemently disagree with each other, while one side has a huge military edge over the other.

One has to try and put themselves in the place of the folks in Gaza. So far, 80 gazans have been killed. So, what would you do if you had an IDF airstrike destroy a house in your neighborhood, killing/maiming one of your relatives who is not a militant in Hamas, how would you react?

Keep in mind, Gazans do not have an Iron Dome, they are getting there ass whopped.

Gaza is a very densely populated area, some of the civilians of Gaza(elderly men, and women, not the militant ones) are calling the actions of the IDF war crimes.

Anyway Glenn, I feel what your saying. But who from the international community, would want to go into Gaza and fight a war with those folks? This would surely lead to deaths from the international community. Let us keep in mind, west bankers are not launching rockets, militants from Hamas are launching rockets at Israel, because they dont have anywhere near the strength of the Israeli military. The international community , including the United States, may not be on board with an occupation of Gaza.

Lets not forget about the new Palestine unity gov, which the USA has said it wants to work with.

It's pretty clear that neither Gaza nor Israel can fix this problem. The US has to step up and the international community has to occupy Gaza and rout out all the rockets. Israel doesn't have the resources to fix the problem itself, and Gaza cannot be expected to shake the control of the terrorist organization running it.

How about we mind our own business? Israel could take care of the gaza problem if we just let them. How about we just offer to veto any UN resolution that comes up to stop them from prosecuting a well deserved spanking on gaza? I say that hamas is a terrorist organization that was elected to power. Show the bastards the error of their ways...

Spank them hard...

__________________
Credo quia absurdum.

Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

Essentially the West had grown extremely sensitive to casualties, both civilian and military- many times to a degree that incapacitates the ability to conduct war properly. In Israel almost everyone knows someone on the front line and wants to see them safe, the borders between frontline and rear, military and civilian grew kind of blurred.

The human mind has a tendency to repress. When Israel pulled out of Gaza everyone knew that it'll come to this, but actively or passively, vocally or silently repressed it (of course some acted exactly the opposite- but a minority).

Now we have Iron Dome to protect us. The original intention for it was to be deployed at strategic military locations and not to protect the general populace, but again the passivity dictated its usage.

Now people see the system and how great it works and think that the fight is over, we can just hunker down, deflect everything they throw at us and just wait it out. Repressing the fact that throughout history- whenever a technological improvement presented an unbreakable defense- a different technological improvement invited presented the weapon that can break that defense.
That is without taking into account the monetary drain it causes, or the terror effect even without major casualties, nor the fact that Iron Dome doesn't and can't protect all towns...

Some source was recently cited saying that only 30% of Israelis support a ground campaign. I don't know if its true and I don't know what the survey consisted off (I think its way off personally) but the trend is showing- people don't want to risk soldiers lives for what they perceive as an unnecessary risk.

The Iron Dome is a fantastic tactical achievement, but the way it is currently employed makes for a devastating strategy.

A very informative post! I had no idea that sort of thinking was going on.

The photos you posted are very disturbing. I mean, to me, not in themselves.